You should not omit the specialization to wage wars everywhere else in the world and stirring in everyone else's soup. 
Greece asking for $59 billion now, yes more bailouts and absolutely no such thing as failure!!
- Thread starter S2007S
- Start date
Or unemployment, wages, GDP, potential rate increases, China, Russia, and whatever other fun might rear it's head. Greece is a convenient distraction from the other issues that surely haven't gone away.
The criminals at Goldman Sachs should pay a few hundred billion to Greece, they are the main cause of the problem (in fact, they are probably the cause to most problems in the world) and made BIG money from it...
You should not omit the specialization to wage wars everywhere else in the world and stirring in everyone else's soup.
You are 100% right on this, but your point is in my favor. Here's a good example. The US more or less started a war against Spain in 1898 and stripped her of her remaining colonial possessions. One of those possessions was the Philippines which were fighting to become independent. The US decided that it instead liked the Philippines under US control and fought a war against the rebels. Despite this being a semi-wartime situation, there was considerable protest against the conflict in the US.
The most loved US writer is arguably Mark Twain. He was against the fight against the Philippines rebels and proposed this flag for the US colony there:
http://www.historiansagainstwar.org/blog/2008/04/mark-twains-flag-for-american-colony-in.html
Again, the US has a 239-year history of vigorous dissent. Of the non English speaking countries in Europe, I suppose we're the most similar to Switzerland. I wonder how dissent is treated there.
Wtf. Similar to Switzerland? The most pacifist nation and then the most violent, intruding, controlling, scheming , and influencing nation would not even fit on the same continent. Whom are you kidding here bro? Someone else pointed it out already but you still have disabled babies born every day in Vietnam as a result of America's "operations". Not a single penny is paid to them nor does the US give a rats ass as soon as strategic interests shift elsewhere. Or how else do you explain leaving Taiwan on its own, fucking up Iraq worse than ever before , leaving chaos behind Afghanistan and half of the middle east. And this is not even completing 1/10th of the list. Starting two world wars is nothing compared to this. Unbelievable.
You are 100% right on this, but your point is in my favor. Here's a good example. The US more or less started a war against Spain in 1898 and stripped her of her remaining colonial possessions. One of those possessions was the Philippines which were fighting to become independent. The US decided that it instead liked the Philippines under US control and fought a war against the rebels. Despite this being a semi-wartime situation, there was considerable protest against the conflict in the US.
The most loved US writer is arguably Mark Twain. He was against the fight against the Philippines rebels and proposed this flag for the US colony there:
http://www.historiansagainstwar.org/blog/2008/04/mark-twains-flag-for-american-colony-in.html
Again, the US has a 239-year history of vigorous dissent. Of the non English speaking countries in Europe, I suppose we're the most similar to Switzerland. I wonder how dissent is treated there.
OK, so the Greeks know that if you owe the bank a little the bank owns you but if you owe a lot you own the bank. I laughed out loud when I heard they want another $59 Billion! It's like they stood up and said "no, really, wait, because we want to own you some more"
In economics and political terms of course. And in things like gun control and a republic structure.
This is total BS. Disabled babies have been born on this planet every day for thousands of years but if someone can put a political spin on it they do. No actual evidence for it.
Huh? Taiwan is doing fine. If you feel differently, why don't the Germans sign a mutual defense treaty with them.
As I've said before, Americans complain about government mistakes all the time and I think this is one. However, as time has gone on I'm not so sure. With the Obama administration, it appears that US policy is to keep the Arabs from uniting into yet another powerful nation for the US to deal with. Thus the various pan Arabists have come to early ends through US influence and the US does little to stop ISIS from growing.
And this makes sense as the US competes with Europe. You guys will be the ones who have to deal with ISIS, not the US. We're setting all-time records for oil production, you're the ones who depend on middle eastern oil, not us. It will be you who decide to pick up the pieces in the middle east or not. Good luck! Maybe it isn't in Europe's best interest to have America run their foreign policy for them.
First of all, there were something like a hundred million people killed in those two wars which is far far in excess of anything that's happened before or since. But maybe this is an opportunity to discuss something other than the question "does evil results in other countries imply that US and British policy has been undemocratic with respect to their own citizens".
You shouldn't blame them all of both wars on Germany. Germany was occupied by the US and Britain beginning in 1945 and we forced the Germans to believe grey situations were instead black and white. This has become a permanent part of German culture, LOL. Let me try to reeducate you in the nature of power politics between nations...
Germany certainly didn't start the first world war. The war began when Austria invaded Serbia. Then a series of alliances forced all the big European nations into the war. And they all entered in great enthusiasm with expectation that there would be glory for all and the troops would be back by Christmas (similar to the Franco-Prussian war of around 1870).
People often attribute the beginning of the second world war with the invasion of Poland by Germany. But it should be noted that this was in support of the majority German population in regions which Poland had taken over as a result of the very unfair treaty ending the first world war. And that treaty was obtained by continuing the "starvation blockade" against Germany past November 11, 1918 (when the shooting stopped) until June 28, 1919 (when the treaty was signed). During those extra 6 months of "formal war" about 250,000 Germans starved to death. Of course the German leaders of the second world war remembered all this very well and it effected their policies. But the immediate effect in 1919 was that Germany was forced to give up lands where Germans had lived for 600 years.
Germany demanded the return of Danzig, a city that was 90% German speaking, to Germany. Poland refused. This you probably know. What you might not know is that this was not the only problem the Poles were having at the time. The Poles were having the same problem with the Lithuanians. In fact, Poland included Vilnius, the traditional capital of Lithuania. And the Polish response to this was also militaristic. In 1938 they sent an ultimatum to Lithuania, and, in the face of superior military force, the Lithuanians backed down:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1938_Polish_ultimatum_to_Lithuania
When Czechoslovakia was forced to concede German territory back to Germany in the Munich Agreement of September 30, 1938, the Poles sent an ultimatum to Czechoslovakia to demand a portion of Zaolzie. What I'm saying here is that Poland was not some innocent little country just trying to have peace. They were a warlike and nationalistic state with an authoritarian government that was abusive to minorities. Did you know that they kept prison camps for political prisoners, most notably the Bereza Kartuska concentration camp? This camp also held communist sympathizers. It closed on the day that the Soviets invaded in 1939:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bereza_Kartuska_prison
So this was the peaceful little country that Britain gave a guarantee to go to war "in the event of any action which clearly threatened Polish independence". The result was that it was Britain who declared war on Germany, not vice versa. If Britain hadn't made that stupid guarantee, the stupid Poles might have negotiated with Germany to give up the territories that did not want to be Polish and the matter could have been decided peacefully.
In the event, the USSR and Germany divided Poland but the British declared war only against Germany, not against the USSR. Why do you suppose that was?
What happened with Poland is that the British were pursuing their ancient strategy of "power balancing" in Europe. That is, fight on the side of whoever is weaker. For a couple of centuries that meant fighting against the French, but as Germany grew stronger after roughly 1870, it meant going against German interests. It was a miscalculation on three sides; the result was the obliteration of Germany, incredible damage to Poland, and the end of the British empire.
I'm not arguing here that the Nazis were great guys. They were awful. What I'm pointing out is that the world is an immensely complicated place with no governments run by Mother Theresas or Saints. The fact that the Swiss haven't invaded anyone is easily explained by the fact that they are land locked by bigger countries that could easily conquer therm. They are forced to be peaceful by their own inadequacies.
Last edited:
Can you involved, knowledgable parties actually envision Greece slowly adjusting and adopting
relative austerity to meet EU membership requirements? I cant.
Wouldnt it be better for Greece, to simultaneously recieve more assistance, slowly reform from these current extremes under the guise of maintaining EU membership , and prepare for an eventual, inevetable Grexit and monetary independence.
It seems to me that the EU has adapted swiftly , thanks to Greece, to have the resources to deal with a dysfunctional member. This in the long run is a good thing i would think.
Its worth loaning a bad relative or friend a last $100 bucks , never to be repaid, to get rid of them.
EU should meet terms of the Greece proposal, haircuts, growth stimulus, et al, as a final
political jesture to counter the somewhat accurate "ball and chain austerity" inflicted(ha!) ,
on the Greek people. Greece will fail, Germany and the EU will be rightoeus victims of hapless Greeks and a line can then be more tightly drawn and defined for inevitible wayward states.
I propose a 51st state or the Commonwealth of Greece. God knows we wouldnt bitch and moan over such a pittance. We could spill that much whiskey.
relative austerity to meet EU membership requirements? I cant.
Wouldnt it be better for Greece, to simultaneously recieve more assistance, slowly reform from these current extremes under the guise of maintaining EU membership , and prepare for an eventual, inevetable Grexit and monetary independence.
It seems to me that the EU has adapted swiftly , thanks to Greece, to have the resources to deal with a dysfunctional member. This in the long run is a good thing i would think.
Its worth loaning a bad relative or friend a last $100 bucks , never to be repaid, to get rid of them.
EU should meet terms of the Greece proposal, haircuts, growth stimulus, et al, as a final
political jesture to counter the somewhat accurate "ball and chain austerity" inflicted(ha!) ,
on the Greek people. Greece will fail, Germany and the EU will be rightoeus victims of hapless Greeks and a line can then be more tightly drawn and defined for inevitible wayward states.
I propose a 51st state or the Commonwealth of Greece. God knows we wouldnt bitch and moan over such a pittance. We could spill that much whiskey.